Libertarianism in practice

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by FlashDangerpants »

Okay, the pointless cul-de-sac of you refusing to accept that I mean stuff I say isn't going to go anywhere, so I guess we should return to the praxis of your libertarianism thing. The question of how such a society can be organised is more likely to result in something interesting.
henry quirk wrote: Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:16 am I am however curious what makes you so sure you could assemble a functional society of people who assent that chickens can be fucked without recrimination because they aren't people.

Oh, I don't think I'd have to. Beastiality may not be immoral, but most folks think it's disgusting and whacky and won't have truck with a chicken lover. Chicken Joe, for example, has tons of sex with his flock, privately, behind close doors. No one knows about it. Most think Joe is an okay guy. It gets out, though, and suddenly no one, or nearly no one will transact with him.

Shunning can work, and it cuts deep when it does.
Shunning only works in little villages where everyone knows everybody else. Nobody except (poosibly?) you thinks that the minarchism you describe can work on a larger scale than such a village. Stuff like this is why.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by henry quirk »

Shunning only works in little villages where everyone knows everybody else.

tell that to the cancel folks
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by FlashDangerpants »

henry quirk wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 7:33 pm Shunning only works in little villages where everyone knows everybody else.

tell that to the cancel folks
People transact every day with these cancelled folks. I've never heard of one being so cancelled that they leave the country.

The shunning you describe clearly isn't possible unless your society is small enough for it to work.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by henry quirk »

FlashDangerpants wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 8:10 pm
henry quirk wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 7:33 pm Shunning only works in little villages where everyone knows everybody else.

tell that to the cancel folks
People transact every day with these cancelled folks. I've never heard of one being so cancelled that they leave the country.

The shunning you describe clearly isn't possible unless your society is small enough for it to work.
I'm bettin' Kevin Spacey gets groceries under an assumed name, and I'm not sure where his pedo-ass is these days.

And Roman Polanski had to run fast, hard, and far: sure, he was avoidin' prosecution, but still...

Anyway: I never said shunnin' was full-proof only that shunning can work, and it cuts deep when it does. And -- correct me if I'm wrong -- I never said nuthin' about the shunned leavin' the country.

As I think on it: it really never has to go beyond Joe the chicken lover's immediate community. Folks way the hell over there who've never heard of Joe, well, how would they even know about Joe's chicken love?

So, okay, I'll concede shunning only works locally (cuz it only has to work locally).
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by FlashDangerpants »

henry quirk wrote: Tue Dec 21, 2021 3:16 am I am however curious what makes you so sure you could assemble a functional society of people who assent that chickens can be fucked without recrimination because they aren't people.

Oh, I don't think I'd have to. Beastiality may not be immoral, but most folks think it's disgusting and whacky and won't have truck with a chicken lover. Chicken Joe, for example, has tons of sex with his flock, privately, behind close doors. No one knows about it. Most think Joe is an okay guy. It gets out, though, and suddenly no one, or nearly no one will transact with him.

Shunning can work, and it cuts deep when it does.
So, shunning is now not much of a deterrent, Chicken Joe can buy all the provisions he wants, either via Amazon or by just driving to the next village. So that's one person who your constituency all think is vile and they want him gone, but they can't do anything practical about it.

Meanwhile, this laissez faire jurisprudence is obviously hugely enticing to all sorts of other criminals and perverts, they all want to live in your town. They aren't even going to shun each other.
promethean75
Posts: 4932
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by promethean75 »

What is your position on chickophilia, the attraction to pre-pubescent chickens?
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by henry quirk »

So, shunning is now not much of a deterrent, Chicken Joe can buy all the provisions he wants, either via Amazon or by just driving to the next village. So that's one person who your constituency all think is vile and they want him gone, but they can't do anything practical about it.

you're makin' a lot of assumptions about Joe

and: they don't have to do anything except, as each chooses, avoid him

and here's the kicker, guy: it's entirely possible folks won't bat an eye at Joe, or, that Joe may never advertise his chicken love, or, the Free Zone may morph into the Chicken Love Zone, or, the whole thing might implode in the first year, or, it may catch fire and spread globally, or...

pretty sure the folks who started your nation, and those who started mine, had no crystal balls: none of them couida predicted your empire would become a barely-noticed raisin or my republic a fragmented, self-devourin', zombie-nation

you'd have me write a future history, accountin' for everything: I can't, and neither can you

Meanwhile, this laissez faire jurisprudence is obviously hugely enticing to all sorts of other criminals and perverts, they all want to live in your town. They aren't even going to shun each other.

I think you over-estimate the number of pervs who are actually stable and capable

if Joe, for example, truly loves chickens, it's unlikely he's gonna be a pillar of his community (in your country and mine, pervs probably dominate the halls of power and they get away with it precisely becuz they're in the halls of power...the Free Zone has no legislators or executives or halls of power)

as for criminals: which set? neo-liberal or natural rights libertarian?

-----

What is your position on chickophilia, the attraction to pre-pubescent chickens?

if the chickie is emancipated: have at it
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

'nuff said

Post by henry quirk »

User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by FlashDangerpants »

henry quirk wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 9:04 pm So, shunning is now not much of a deterrent, Chicken Joe can buy all the provisions he wants, either via Amazon or by just driving to the next village. So that's one person who your constituency all think is vile and they want him gone, but they can't do anything practical about it.

you're makin' a lot of assumptions about Joe

and: they don't have to do anything except, as each chooses, avoid him
So they are required to do nothing other than turn a blind eye to the depravity and the perpetrator too. Given how much vengeance your justice system requires for theft, it seems just unrealistic that the people who pursue death for thft like the Saudis are also the people who live and let live for crack dealers, chicken fuckers and let's be honest, Jeffrey Epstein, he would have been fine in your country, assuming he paid those girls.

henry quirk wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 9:04 pm and here's the kicker, guy: it's entirely possible folks won't bat an eye at Joe, or, that Joe may never advertise his chicken love, or, the Free Zone may morph into the Chicken Love Zone, or, the whole thing might implode in the first year, or, it may catch fire and spread globally, or...

pretty sure the folks who started your nation, and those who started mine, had no crystal balls: none of them couida predicted your empire would become a barely-noticed raisin or my republic a fragmented, self-devourin', zombie-nation

you'd have me write a future history, accountin' for everything: I can't, and neither can you
None of those guys started from nothing with no preparation beyond a 3 line constitution that collapses everything in the world into "property". They inherited existing Anglo Saxon law and built their extra bits and bobs on top. Yours is a process of throwing almost everything away and trusting to luck.

But more importantly, you keep trying to have this exact conversation about Marxism, so you should be able to do it for your thing. Otherwise, take everything you wrote there, and apply it to that. Or apply your own criticism of Marxism - your good point that it runs contrary to human nature - and think about how it applies to your minarchism thing where all it would take for it to fail is a few greedy people gaming the system.
henry quirk wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 9:04 pm Meanwhile, this laissez faire jurisprudence is obviously hugely enticing to all sorts of other criminals and perverts, they all want to live in your town. They aren't even going to shun each other.

I think you over-estimate the number of pervs who are actually stable and capable
Have you noticed what's been going on with the Cathiolic Church for the last couple of decades?
henry quirk wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 9:04 pm if Joe, for example, truly loves chickens, it's unlikely he's gonna be a pillar of his community (in your country and mine, pervs probably dominate the halls of power and they get away with it precisely becuz they're in the halls of power...the Free Zone has no legislators or executives or halls of power)
The prison wings full of sex offenders who wouldn't be classed as criminals under your regime demonstrates that is total garbage.
henry quirk wrote: Wed Dec 29, 2021 9:04 pm as for criminals: which set? neo-liberal or natural rights libertarian?
Criminals as defined by modern liberal democracies, your own list of available crimes seems to be somewhat truncated.
promethean75
Posts: 4932
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by promethean75 »

"you keep trying to have this exact conversation about Marxism, so you should be able to do it for your thing."

Bruh I was just getting ready to point that out! Member two weeks ago Henry was all 'that's just the theory... I wanna see it in practice'... and then today, when asked theoretical questions about the state of his minarchism, he's like 'how could I possibly know, yada yada.'

Real piece of work, that Henry.
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by FlashDangerpants »

promethean75 wrote: Thu Dec 30, 2021 12:58 am Bruh I was just getting ready to point that out! Member two weeks ago Henry was all 'that's just the theory... I wanna see it in practice'... and then today, when asked theoretical questions about the state of his minarchism, he's like 'how could I possibly know, yada yada.'
Indeed, he even wrote this...
henry quirk wrote: Tue Dec 14, 2021 2:35 am I, of course, will attempt to wreck your utopia.
Which is a bit of an invitation really.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by henry quirk »

So they are required to do nothing other than turn a blind eye to the depravity and the perpetrator too.

The only requirement is that no one violate the life, liberty, or property of another.

They aren't obligated to shun Joe: I think most would...I could be wrong...they might, as I said, follow suit


Given how much vengeance your justice system requires for theft, it seems just unrealistic that the people who pursue death for thft

never said the Free Zone folks were vengance-minded or that death is automatic for theft

read the 3rd line again

Jeffrey Epstein, he would have been fine in your country, assuming he paid those girls.

adults, yeah; children, nope

None of those guys started from nothing with no preparation beyond a 3 line constitution that collapses everything in the world into "property". They inherited existing Anglo Saxon law and built their extra bits and bobs on top. Yours is a process of throwing almost everything away and trusting to luck.

They inherit conventions.

But more importantly, you keep trying to have this exact conversation about Marxism,

in case you haven't noticed: I gave up on that a while back

no one posited diddly...no vision were offered


you should be able to do it for your thing.

I am & I think I'm doin' a damn fine job of it too (unlike the marxists who didn't even try)


Otherwise, take everything you wrote there, and apply it to that.

Can't see how what I'm envisioning is compatible with marxism


all it would take for it to fail is a few greedy people gaming the system.

only way it fails is if folks abandon the 3

Cathiolic Church prison wings

there's 7 billion on this planet: how many perv priests and prison pervs are there?

your own list of available crimes seems to be somewhat truncated.

yep

-----

then today, when asked theoretical questions about the state of his minarchism, he's like 'how could I possibly know, yada yada.'

I've been answerin' and counterin' admirably (damn sight better than the commies)

only so many times I can get harangued about beatialists before I just throw my hands up and move on...and even then, I answered multiple times (just not in a way that made flash happy)

-----

Which is a bit of an invitation really.

as I say: I've made and am makin' the effort

not seein' a soul from the marxists doin' the same

done for the night: tomorrow I'll jump back into it
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by FlashDangerpants »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Dec 30, 2021 2:29 am Jeffrey Epstein, he would have been fine in your country, assuming he paid those girls.

adults, yeah; children, nope
What place has a government regulation like age of consent got in your zone where the state has withered away?

If a young person decides they are willing to sell their body any harm in that transaction is surely self inflicted just as was the case with the meth head. Other places have the legal notion that until a certain age that choice is not valid, but the self directing freely transacting inhabitants of your burg call everyone who makes such rules a slaver.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 14706
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
Location: Right here, a little less busy.

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by henry quirk »

age of consent

it's capacity for consent, related to age but not consistently

I've never met a six year old capable of truly consentin' to anything

I've met a few teens who were: one, legally emancipated

here in the states: age of, capacity for, consent, particularly in sexual matters, is set all over the place...in virginia, for example, if I recollect right, someone over 18 can have sex with a 15 year old and, if caught, be charged with only a misdemeanor; and in medical matters, in many states, 16 is considered the age where a person can, at the very least, have some control over what is done to them in-hospital

in the Free Zone, a seasoned minarchy, emancipation would be common, I think

the biggest hurdle, seems to me, wouldn't be the young gettin' emancipated (goin' to court to illustrate competence in self-direction, -responsibility, and -reliance) but children contendin' against parents who may not wanna let 'em go

so: now you'll ask where is any of this found in the 3?; and I'll say consent is there, embedded; and then you'll say what right do parents have to enslave their children?; and I'll say it ain't slavery it's care-takin' and I'll also say the 3 dictates against violation, not love or common sense; then you'll say...

so it goes...

as for epstein: haven't really followed that nonsense (for reasons not germane to our current conversation), but, as I understand it, coercion was a large part of his and Maxwell's crime...coercion is a no-no in the here & now (at least, and supposedly, in the liberal democracies you love so much) and even more so in the then & there of the Free Zone
User avatar
FlashDangerpants
Posts: 6266
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm

Re: Libertarianism in practice

Post by FlashDangerpants »

henry quirk wrote: Thu Dec 30, 2021 4:13 pm so: now you'll ask where is any of this found in the 3?; and I'll say consent is there, embedded; and then you'll say what right do parents have to enslave their children?; and I'll say it ain't slavery it's care-takin' and I'll also say the 3 dictates against violation, not love or common sense; then you'll say...
Explain "care taking" versus "slavery". The act of licensing medical doctors so that only professionals who can demonstrate years of training and have passed exams may prescribe powerful pharmaceuticals was recently dscribed by you as "slavery-lite", why isn't it care taking?
Post Reply